Fed is still the better player, the reason he lost the semis to Murray is....

Seriously, the only reason Fed lost this match (and it's only one match after all...) is that his serve was the worst I've seen him in a long long time.
Thinking that he was hitting almost only 2nd serves and managed to push Murray to 5 sets shows all the greatness of the man. On the other hand, Murray was serving very well throughout. Huge difference, right there. Look no further. It was a bad day for Fed, it can happen. It's clear than if Fed had served like he has through the tournament until the semis, he would have had a real chance at winning this.

It's pretty clear that Federer didn't play amazingly well during the match. Murray's play was the overwhelming factor in the match's outcome, however. He did everything he need to in order to win. His serving was downright insane and he was committed to his strategy of exploiting Federer's backhand during the entire match. Federer made some poor tactical errors and Murray capitalized on almost every occasion. Murray played an exceptional match and I cannot take that away from him.

Seriously, the only reason Fed lost this match (and it's only one match after all...) is that his serve was the worst I've seen him in a long long time.
Thinking that he was hitting almost only 2nd serves and managed to push Murray to 5 sets shows all the greatness of the man. On the other hand, Murray was serving very well throughout. Huge difference, right there. Look no further. It was a bad day for Fed, it can happen. It's clear than if Fed had served like he has through the tournament until the semis, he would have had a real chance at winning this.

Click to expand...

So why did he stop serving like he has when he reached the most crucial matches of the tournament?

So why did he stop serving like he has when he reached the most crucial matches of the tournament?

Click to expand...

I really wish the outcome of Federer's matches weren't so dependent upon his serving performance. Unfortunately, at this stage of his career, he needs to serve extremely well to give him a chance at winning these big matches against Djokovic, Murray, and Nadal.

If you could just go out and serve as well as you wanted, then perhaps I would be a professional tennis player by now. :lol:

Click to expand...

Come on. Fed is a pro. He knows more than anyone else out there just exactly what it takes to win Slams. By the time he reaches the semis he's in cruise control and coming into peak performance. Dodgy serving is for the early rounds against nobodies who would never be able to take much advantage of them anyway.

Might it just be that Murray as an opponent was hitting so well that it made Fed nervous and put him off his serve? If he was serving below par in the semi-final of a Slam, there must have been a good reason and, for my money, the good reason was the guy on the other side of the net!

Seriously, the only reason Fed lost this match (and it's only one match after all...) is that his serve was the worst I've seen him in a long long time.
Thinking that he was hitting almost only 2nd serves and managed to push Murray to 5 sets shows all the greatness of the man. On the other hand, Murray was serving very well throughout. Huge difference, right there. Look no further. It was a bad day for Fed, it can happen. It's clear than if Fed had served like he has through the tournament until the semis, he would have had a real chance at winning this.

Click to expand...

Well that and 56 enforced errors, something of a record. He played tired, timing was off. But that's not to take anything from Murray, he played great, I pick him over Djoke.

Might it just be that Murray as an opponent was hitting so well that it made Fed nervous and put him off his serve? If he was serving below par, there must have been a good and, for my money, the good reason was the guy on the other side of the net!

Click to expand...

Bingo. If I remember correctly, Fed was actually putting in a decent amount of first serves the first couple of games, but Murray's returning was extraordinary. What would have been an ace (or service winner, at the least) against other opponents was neutralized by Murray. From there on, his chances of winning a point dramatically went up.

Fed was going for better placement on his first serve than previous matches and therefore missed quite a few. Of course, he is usually able to place the serve pretty well, but Murray's great return game surely didn't help.

Seriously, the only reason Fed lost this match (and it's only one match after all...) is that his serve was the worst I've seen him in a long long time.
Thinking that he was hitting almost only 2nd serves and managed to push Murray to 5 sets shows all the greatness of the man. On the other hand, Murray was serving very well throughout. Huge difference, right there. Look no further. It was a bad day for Fed, it can happen. It's clear than if Fed had served like he has through the tournament until the semis, he would have had a real chance at winning this.

Click to expand...

He'll never play consistently brilliant tennis again. His foot movement is a fraction slower than in his prime, hence the shanks. Still a great player but he's now 3/4 not 1/2, and won't be again.

Nice theory and what is the excuse for his other 10 losses to Murray now?

Click to expand...

Murray's a beast now, physically and mentally. It's amazing how many people are desperate to give him no credit at all. I think he's more naturally gifted than lance (he owned him in juniors) and is now catching up physically and mentally.

Come on. Fed is a pro. He knows more than anyone else out there just exactly what it takes to win Slams. By the time he reaches the semis he's in cruise control and coming into peak performance. Dodgy serving is for the early rounds against nobodies who would never be able to take much advantage of them anyway.

Might it just be that Murray as an opponent was hitting so well that it made Fed nervous and put him off his serve? If he was serving below par in the semi-final of a Slam, there must have been a good reason and, for my money, the good reason was the guy on the other side of the net!

Click to expand...

He also was not serving very well against Tsonga. I don't care who you are or how great you are at something, you aren't always going to play your best. Showing remarkable consistency is usually just a case of having a much higher general level than your opponents.

It isn't taking anything away from Murray to say Fed wasn't at his best. Murray was likely not as his absolute best either. Murray got the win and that is all that matters. I'll be rooting for Murray at 3:30 am my time, by the way. :lol:

Fed was definitely far from his best. Horrendous serving and festival of UEs.

Click to expand...

The problem is that Fed is going to have to bring out close to his best for at least two matches in order to win another slam. That is obviously getting difficult for him, not to mention that his current best is no longer going to guarantee a win.

It is still possible, but it would be easier if he could pick up a couple of the better draws. :lol:

This is good news for you, of course, but don't count him out completely.

Consistency still counts for a lot, and will give Federer a few more chances at a Slam. It is only January and Federer has played well after an amazing run last year. You can't play your best tennis all the time. I would be happy for Federer to peak around WO.

Murray's a beast now, physically and mentally. It's amazing how many people are desperate to give him no credit at all. I think he's more naturally gifted than lance (he owned him in juniors) and is now catching up physically and mentally.

Click to expand...

Djokovic will win a significantly higher number of slams then Murray when all is said and done. He is far and away the better player. murray can't even play on clay.

It's pretty clear that Federer didn't play amazingly well during the match. Murray's play was the overwhelming factor in the match's outcome, however. He did everything he need to in order to win. His serving was downright insane and he was committed to his strategy of exploiting Federer's backhand during the entire match. Federer made some poor tactical errors and Murray capitalized on almost every occasion. Murray played an exceptional match and I cannot take that away from him.

Click to expand...

Very true. Murray played very well, and Fed did not play well tactically. I don't know why he didn't try to be more aggressive instead of rallying from the back over and over again. Easier said than done of course. I guess the fact that his 1st serve % was very poor didn't help him to attack as much as he would have liked. Maybe also his long 5 set match against Tsonga tired him more than expected. After all Fed is amazing but he's not a machine, right?

yes but isn't it true of every player these days? Take Murray's 1st serve out and he's not winning this match. Any top player would be in deep trouble if their 1st serve % was as bad as Roger's today.

Click to expand...

Murray's 1st serve is a big weapon but I'm not sure it's his main one. I would say his main one is his incredible defense. Both Djoko and Murray have a more powerful ground game than current Fed and much better (more consistent) defensive skills. (doesn't mean they can afford a crap serve but still, they don't rely on the serve as much)

Murray's 1st serve is a big weapon but I'm not sure it's his main one. I would say his main one is his incredible defense. Both Djoko and Murray have a more powerful ground game than current Fed and much better (more consistent) defensive skills. (doesn't mean they can afford a crap serve but still, they don't rely on the serve as much)

Click to expand...

Don't know. All I saw was the greatest version of Murray vs the worst version of an exhausted Federer. And even still...it went 5 sets! :lol: :lol:

I remember Murray being exhausted playing Nadal at USO 2011 as a result of having played Isner the day before. Much like when Murray was fairly tired after the taxing matches with Dolgopolov and Ferrer at AO 2011 and then having to meet Djokovic 2.0 in the final.

Murray hit harder, moved faster, served better, was Federer's equal at net, and usually made better strategic decisions. Only thing Federer did better was win tiebreaks. Part of it is the surface mechanics too, but Federer isn't really the favorite anymore against Murray in hard court slams. Maybe at Wimbledon or RG, if that. Federer did well to manufacture a path to a fifth set. Total points won was heavily in Murray's favor.

Lol indeed. Game-wise it should have been straights. Murray is still very far from being a mental giant!

Click to expand...

Well you can't completely blame Murray for that. As you said in the match thread, Tiebreakerer was in full flight in the match :lol:, and well Fed is the best TB player on the current tour (and most probably history). Hard to win TB's from that man.

If there were no TB's it would have been a straight sets affair no doubt.

Well you can't completely blame Murray for that. As you said in the match thread, Tiebreakerer was in full flight in the match :lol:, and well Fed is the best TB player on the current tour (and most probably history). Hard to win TB's from that man.

If there were no TB's it would have been a straight sets affair no doubt.

Click to expand...

Still no excuse for botching that overhead so badly (in second set TB I think).

Seriously, the only reason Fed lost this match (and it's only one match after all...) is that his serve was the worst I've seen him in a long long time.
Thinking that he was hitting almost only 2nd serves and managed to push Murray to 5 sets shows all the greatness of the man. On the other hand, Murray was serving very well throughout. Huge difference, right there. Look no further. It was a bad day for Fed, it can happen. It's clear than if Fed had served like he has through the tournament until the semis, he would have had a real chance at winning this.

Very true. Murray played very well, and Fed did not play well tactically. I don't know why he didn't try to be more aggressive instead of rallying from the back over and over again. Easier said than done of course. I guess the fact that his 1st serve % was very poor didn't help him to attack as much as he would have liked. Maybe also his long 5 set match against Tsonga tired him more than expected. After all Fed is amazing but he's not a machine, right?

Click to expand...

Absolutely agree!

I think Roger's become very wary of the running forehand that Murray, Djokovic, and Nadal all possess. That's why he seldom uses the down-the-line forehand against them because he knows that no matter how well he plays the point, there's always the possibility of that shot being hit back as a crosscourt winner. Also, Murray was playing very aggressively and everything he hit was going over or landing in. Roger is very aware that he cannot sustain a high level of aggressive play without giving anything up, and against Murray, that cannot be afforded. And, as you said, he was getting close to nothing from his serve.

I honestly don't think his match against Tsonga had much to do with this loss. The QF match really wasn't a very physical one and Roger has recovered from tougher five-set matches before. I do think that the sheer amount of energy (both physical and emotional) he put into winning the fourth set left him drained for the fifth, and that's why he dropped his serve so early in that set. Full credit to Andy for not allowing his concentration to drop after being broken when serving for the match in the fourth set. He recovered very well in the fifth.

To me, though, what's really amazing is that despite his serve being almost completely absent during that match he managed to win both of the sets that went into tiebreaks. That speaks volumes about how well Roger fought in this match. I said it many times before but I never saw Roger fight harder in any match than I did in this one. And he made me extremely proud to be his fan after that match because of it!

Murray hit harder, moved faster, served better, was Federer's equal at net, and usually made better strategic decisions. Only thing Federer did better was win tiebreaks. Part of it is the surface mechanics too, but Federer isn't really the favorite anymore against Murray in hard court slams. Maybe at Wimbledon or RG, if that. Federer did well to manufacture a path to a fifth set. Total points won was heavily in Murray's favor.

Click to expand...

Still Federer showed great fighting qualities. He fought right to the end.

Murray's 1st serve is a big weapon but I'm not sure it's his main one. I would say his main one is his incredible defense. Both Djoko and Murray have a more powerful ground game than current Fed and much better (more consistent) defensive skills. (doesn't mean they can afford a crap serve but still, they don't rely on the serve as much)

Click to expand...

That is true, Murray has a better defensive game than Federer at this time but a big reason Murray won and Federer lost is that Murray had over four times the number of aces that Federer had and Federer did not serve well enough himself.